Zack Snyder will direct SUPERMAN

Man, am I divided about this whole concept. I like the idea of Nolan godfathering the movie, and I am pretty good with Goyer drafting and Snyder directing, but the pseudo-origin story (becoming superman, not getting to earth) makes me question it. Right now I am with the crowd that prefers an older (John Hamm) Superman fighting an epic battle that only he could win.

I think I am most interested in this movie (as I am interested in many movies) because it doesn't yet exist and there is simply great untapped promise for an awesome movie. Some movies succeed and I enjoy them as much or more than I thought (Star Trek 2009, Sherlock Holmes) and others fail (Predators, GI Joe, many others). Hopefully, Superman -perhaps my favorite superhero along with Batman- will get a truly great, modern movie.

This may have been mentioned already, but another rumor is that Armie Hammer is in the mix. He was going to play Batman in George Miller's Justice League: Mortal. He's 6' 5", 24 years old, and just got a boost from his part in The Social Network.

Click to expand...

I really liked Armie Hammer in the Social Network, both of him actually (he plays twins). He's pretty well suited for playing a hero with strong moral character (Superman is called the "Big Blue Boy Scout" for a reason). Plus he's not a marquee movie star (a famous actor playing a comic book hero or villain can be very distracting).

The only challenge for him would be Clark Kent, but the same could be said for every actor who plays Superman. If you fail, you make all the other characters around you look like an idiot for not realizing you're the same person. What I wouldn't give for *some* reference in The Man of Steel to a "perception filter." It would be so easy to work it into his origin. You see Clark Kent beating monsters and stopping runaway trains wearing his ordinary street clothes but no one to pays attention, even if he's actively saving their life most people ignore his presence or forget what he did. He puts the big red 'S' and blue tights on just so people will notice. "It's not me remember, just the red cape."

The only challenge for him would be Clark Kent, but the same could be said for every actor who plays Superman. If you fail, you make all the other characters around you look like an idiot for not realizing you're the same person. What I wouldn't give for *some* reference in The Man of Steel to a "perception filter."

Click to expand...

For a moment there, I was afraid you were going to recommend they use that ill-advised story from the 70s where the lenses in Clark Kent's glasses helps him hypnotize others into believe that Clark is older, dumpier and generally less physically impressive than the Man of Steel.

For those of you who have never read or heard of this story: No, I am not making this up.

I really think it boils down to performance. Christopher Reeve was able to distinguish Clark Kent from Superman purely with his mannerisms and physicality. You could believe that people would be able to separate the two identities from one another. I think what it really boils down to is an actor who can successfully separate both identities.

Someone who could give Clark Kent their own character traits and quirks and create a Superman persona that is confident and far removed from the Clark Kent personality. I think, with the right actor, such a balancing act is possible.

I really think it boils down to performance. Christopher Reeve was able to distinguish Clark Kent from Superman purely with his mannerisms and physicality. You could believe that people would be able to separate the two identities from one another. I think what it really boils down to is an actor who can successfully separate both identities.

Someone who could give Clark Kent their own character traits and quirks and create a Superman persona that is confident and far removed from the Clark Kent personality. I think, with the right actor, such a balancing act is possible.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. And Clark doesn't even have to be as broad as Christopher Reeve generally played him. He could just be much more restrained and mild-mannered than Superman tends to be, without being an exaggerated wimp. I could see that working for today's audiences.

Or conversely, we could go the other way, with Clark as the much more developed, human personality and Superman as much more of an aloof, strong & silent type (a la the Fleischer cartoons). I can see either approach working with the right script, director and actor.

Or conversely, we could go the other way, with Clark as the much more developed, human personality and Superman as much more of an aloof, strong & silent type (a la the Fleischer cartoons). I can see either approach working with the right script, director and actor.

Click to expand...

I'm all for that. I think after the Donner/Reeve movies and Superman Returns that a new interpretation and approach to the whole Clark/Superman dynamic is needed. Reeve's approach- and to a lesser extent Routh's- is perfectly valid but I'd like to see a Clark Kent that is more confident, a bit more self-assured.

I think in order to believe that Clark Kent is a serious, legitimate reporter in today's contemporary industrialist climate, the buffoonish approach might be a little unbelievable. Superman can be the strong, silent type- it makes sense anyway since Superman is a sort of Greek god archetype anyway.

The only challenge for him would be Clark Kent, but the same could be said for every actor who plays Superman. If you fail, you make all the other characters around you look like an idiot for not realizing you're the same person. What I wouldn't give for *some* reference in The Man of Steel to a "perception filter."

Click to expand...

For a moment there, I was afraid you were going to recommend they use that ill-advised story from the 70s where the lenses in Clark Kent's glasses helps him hypnotize others into believe that Clark is older, dumpier and generally less physically impressive than the Man of Steel.

For those of you who have never read or heard of this story: No, I am not making this up.

I have a feeling if we're going to get a full-on origin story, it'll likely be non-linear similar to Batman Begins and be very different than Superman: The Movie.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think so, too. I can see this rumored storyline of him traveling the world as journalist Clark Kent as he ponders his future (and past) and then returning to Metropolis and becoming Superman halfway through the film panning out as true.

Click to expand...

I hate it already. There have now been two big rumors about Snyder's Superman. First, the Zod rumor. Now, the Batman Begins formula. Both indicate a heavy bias towards what worked before elsewhere. I'd prefer an epic adventure about Superman as an experienced hero, with no further explorations of his early years. Also, no Luthor and no Zod.

Click to expand...

Though it would make sense for Superman, much more than it does for Batman. Superman protects the entire world, speaks several languages, knows various world customs, etc...

This may have been mentioned already, but another rumor is that Armie Hammer is in the mix. He was going to play Batman in George Miller's Justice League: Mortal. He's 6' 5", 24 years old, and just got a boost from his part in The Social Network.

Click to expand...

I really liked Armie Hammer in the Social Network, both of him actually (he plays twins). He's pretty well suited for playing a hero with strong moral character (Superman is called the "Big Blue Boy Scout" for a reason). Plus he's not a marquee movie star (a famous actor playing a comic book hero or villain can be very distracting).

The only challenge for him would be Clark Kent, but the same could be said for every actor who plays Superman.

Click to expand...

As you've observed, Hammer almost played Batman in the abortive Justice League movie and has the superheroic height and physique. Moreover, he's getting great reviews for playing twins in The Social Network. That can be a challenging task for actors - playing two apparently identical characters, yet ensuring that they're subtly different, so the audience knows who is who. Might this be a good grounding for managing to make his Clark and his Superman credibly the one person, yet different enough that no-one in the cinema world realises it? A variation on a theme?

Apologies for the double post, but I'm not sure if these comments by Snyder have yet been reported in the thread:

As I have already explained, the film will focus on early days of Superman, so there will be no links with other films. This is not a remake then. Similarly, although I still can not talk about the script, I can assure you that this new Superman will not be based on a comic book in particular.

At least Singer had the decency to tell a "returns" story, where everything was already established. Regarding how many times the origin of a superhero has been turned into movies now, this was totally refreshing and original.

Ugh, I'm so sick of origin stories. Everyone knows Superman's origin. Get to the action, that's what he's for dammit! The only time I enjoyed a protracted retelling of an origin was in Batman Begins because it was so amazingly well done and was a globe trotting action story with ninjas

I can only pray the movie OPENS with Clark leaving Smallville to become Supes for the first time. And that it has a villain as physically powerful as he is. And lots of huge action scenes.

If the rumors are correct it's likely not going to be the type of origin story - Krypton to Smallville to Metropolis - we've had before. It'll more likely start with Clark a grown man and already working as a journalist. We'll see him travel the world as he decides how to put his powers to use.

Ugh, I'm so sick of origin stories. Everyone knows Superman's origin. Get to the action, that's what he's for dammit! The only time I enjoyed a protracted retelling of an origin was in Batman Begins because it was so amazingly well done and was a globe trotting action story with ninjas

I can only pray the movie OPENS with Clark leaving Smallville to become Supes for the first time. And that it has a villain as physically powerful as he is. And lots of huge action scenes.

Click to expand...

I agree with you. I have been a superman fan since I was little, that was over 30 years ago! Everyone knows Superman's origins we really don't need a 2 hour movie that takes its sweet time getting to the action.

If the rumors are correct it's likely not going to be the type of origin story - Krypton to Smallville to Metropolis - we've had before. It'll more likely start with Clark a grown man and already working as a journalist. We'll see him travel the world as he decides how to put his powers to use.

Click to expand...

Ooooooohhh... suspenseful! Gee, I wonder what he's going to decide?

C'mon, people. Smallville has already spent 10 years (!) depicting Clark Kent gradually deciding to become Superman. What can possibly be gained by giving us a 2 hour movie showing the same thing? Especially when everyone walking into the theater already knows how it's going to end? Just give us a good Superman story, dammit!

Or conversely, we could go the other way, with Clark as the much more developed, human personality and Superman as much more of an aloof, strong & silent type (a la the Fleischer cartoons). I can see either approach working with the right script, director and actor.

Click to expand...

I'm all for that. I think after the Donner/Reeve movies and Superman Returns that a new interpretation and approach to the whole Clark/Superman dynamic is needed. Reeve's approach- and to a lesser extent Routh's- is perfectly valid but I'd like to see a Clark Kent that is more confident, a bit more self-assured.

I think in order to believe that Clark Kent is a serious, legitimate reporter in today's contemporary industrialist climate, the buffoonish approach might be a little unbelievable. Superman can be the strong, silent type- it makes sense anyway since Superman is a sort of Greek god archetype anyway.

Click to expand...

I think that Lois & Clark was going for that sort of thing, but while I really liked Dean Cain's humanized Clark, his Superman always came off as rather wooden to me. I remember trying to watch the early 90s Superboy show when it was doing the broader, nerdy Clark. And while Christopher Reeve's nerdy Clark was great fun in a movie every 2-3 years, Gerard Christopher's quickly became grating when you saw it every week.

As long as Clark can still be legitimately described as "mild-mannered", there's a lot of leeway for them to play with his characterization.

How engaging it is will depend on how strong the story is. We knew that Bruce Wayne would become Batman in Batman Begins, but that didn't detract from the story leading up to that.

Click to expand...

That's a different case, though, because we'd never gotten a big screen version of Batman's origin before. Even the first Burton movie mostly glossed over it. For Superman, we already have a movie that devotes half of his running time to exactly that. And did a pretty great job of it, to boot.

That's a different case, though, because we'd never gotten a big screen version of Batman's origin before. Even the first Burton movie mostly glossed over it. For Superman, we already have a movie that devotes half of his running time to exactly that. And did a pretty great job of it, to boot.

Click to expand...

Yep, that's why I also said this: If they go with the element of Clark working abroad as a journalist that'll provide a prism of following his journey to becoming Superman that hasn't been seen on screen before.